EPA/540/R-03/505
July 2003
Evaluation of
Wilder Construction Company's
MatCon™ Cover Technology
Innovative Technology Evaluation Report
National Risk Management Research Laboratory
Office of Research and Development
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
-------
Notice
The information in this document has been funded by the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) under Contract No.
68-C5-0037 to Terra Tech EM Inc. It has been subjected to the Agency's peer and administrative reviews and has been approved
for publication as an EPA document. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute an endorsement or
recommendation for use.
-------
Foreword
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is charged by Congress with protecting the Nation's land, air, and water resources.
Under a mandate of national environmental laws, the Agency strives to formulate and implement actions leading to a compatible
balance between human activities and the ability of natural systems to support and nurture life. To meet this mandate, EPA's
research program is providing data and technical support for solving environmental problems today and building a science
knowledge base necessary to manage our ecological resources wisely, understand how pollutants affect our health, and prevent
or reduce environmental risks in the future.
The National Risk Management Research Laboratory is the Agency's center for investigation of technological and manage-
ment approaches for reducing risks from threats to human health and the environment. The focus of the Laboratory's research
program is on methods for the prevention and control of pollution to air, land, water and subsurface resources; protection of
water quality in public water systems; remediation of contaminated sites and ground water; and prevention and control of
indoor air pollution. The goal of this research effort is to catalyze development and implementation of innovative, cost-ef-
fective environmental technologies; develop scientific and engineering information needed by EPA to support regulatory and
policy decisions; and provide technical support and information transfer to ensure effective implementation of environmental
regulations and strategies.
This publication has been produced as part of the Laboratory's strategic long-term research plan. It is published and made avail-
able by EPA's Office of Research and Development to assist the user community and to link researchers with their clients.
Hugh W. McKinnon, Director
National Risk Management Research Laboratory
-------
Abstract
To enhance conventional paving asphalt to make it more suitable for containment applications, Wilder Construc-
tion Company of Everett, Washington, developed MatCon,™ a polymer modified asphalt system. The system is
comprised of a proprietary binder, coupled with a selected aggregate type and gradation, and a specialized job mix
formula. This system, when applied using installation specifications, results in a potentially superior substitution
for conventional paving asphalt in cover containment applications. Under the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) Superfund Innovative Technology Evaluation (SITE) Program, the system was installed for evalua-
tion at two locations, with another possible in 2003.
MatCon™ is intended for use as a waste containment material, to comprise a single or multiple layer cover sys-
tem. MatCon™ is noted for its superior engineering qualities and is designed for long-term performance, yet can
be applied with conventional paving equipment. The hydraulic performance of the material was examined by
both removing destructive samples for laboratory testing, as well as field evaluation. While the study focuses on
hydraulic properties, accompanying engineering properties were evaluated in the laboratory.
An important benefit of MatCon™ is the potential for multi-use as parking, storage of materials, and even recre-
ational sites such as tennis courts, created by the more durable surface that does not need to be covered by soil or
other protective materials. MatCon™ contributes to improved properties over conventional asphalt by rendering
the binder less susceptible to deformation or rutting and less likely to crack in cold climates. The short-term re-
sults of this testing show that MatCon™ specimens were not adversely affected and conventional asphalt mixtures
deteriorated over the 100-day test duration.
This is a long-term research effort, but preliminary results from both laboratory and field surface ponding tests
show that the MatCon™ cover system yields hydraulic conductivity results that meet or exceed fundamental
baseline targets for RCRA Subtitle C cover systems. Research will continue to assess performance over the long-
term.
IV
-------
Contents
List of Figures and Tables vii
Acronyms, Abbreviations, and Symbols viii
Conversion Factors ix
Acknowledgments x
Executive Summary 1
1.0 Introduction 4
1.1 Description of SITE Program and Reports 4
1.1.1 Purpose, History, and Goals of the SITE Program 4
1.1.2 Documentation of Site Demonstration Results 5
1.2 Purpose and Organization of the ITER 5
1.3 MATCON™ Process Technology Description 6
1.4 Key Contacts 6
2.0 Technology Applications Analysis 7
2.1 Site Demonstration Objectives and Conclusions 7
2.2 Feasibility Study Evluation Criteria 11
2.2.1 Overall Protection of Human Health and the Environment 11
2.2.2 Compliance with Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate Requirements 11
2.2.3 Long-Term Effectiveness and Permanence 11
2.2.4 Reduction of Toxicity, Mobility, or Volume Through Treatment 13
2.2.5 Short-Term Effectiveness 13
2.2.6 Implementability 13
2.2.7 Cost 13
2.2.8 State Acceptance 13
2.2.9 Community Acceptance 13
2.3 Technology Applicability 13
2.4 Limitations of the Technology 13
2.4.1 Site Characteristics 13
2.4.2 Quality Control 14
2.4.3 Site Reuse 14
3.0 Economic Analysis 15
3.1 Site-Specific Factors Affecting Cost 15
3.2 Basis of Economic Analysis 16
3.3 Cost Categories 16
3.3.1 Site Preparation 16
3.3.2 Permitting and Regulatory Costs 17
3.3.3 Labor Costs 17
3.3.4 Supplies and Consumables Costs 17
3.4 Cost Per Acre of MATCON™ Cover 17
-------
Contents (continued)
4.0 Technology Effectiveness 18
4.1 Description of the Installed Covers 18
4.1.1 DAFB Site 18
4.1.1.1 Cover Installation 18
4.1.1.2 Drainage System 18
4.1.2 Tri-County Landfill 24
4.1.3 Installation Difficulties 24
4.1.3.1 Subgrade and Drainage Systems 24
4.1.3.2 Cover Construction Quality 24
4.2 Evaluation Procedures 24
4.2.1 Field Testing 29
4.2.1.1 Basis of Measurement of Field Permeability 29
4.2.1.2 DAFB Site 29
4.2.1.3 TCLSite 29
4.2.2 Sampling Methods 29
4.2.2.1 Sampling Obejctives 30
4.2.2.2 Sampling Locations and Procedures 30
4.2.2.3 Sampling Identification and Handling 30
4.2.3 Laboratory Testing 30
4.2.4 Quality Assurance and Quality Control Program 30
4.2.4.1 Field Quality Control Program 34
4.2.4.2 Laboratory Quality Control Program 34
4.3 Site Demonstration Results and Quality Control Program 34
4.4 Discussion of Results 38
4.4.1 Discussion of Field Data 38
4.4.2 Laboratory Data 38
5.0 Technology Status 44
5.1 Commercial Liability 44
5.2 Construction Quality Assurance Requirements 44
6.0 References 45
-------
Figures
2-1 LOCATION OF DOVER AIR FORCE BASE 8
2-2 SITE LOCATION, TRI-COUNTY LANDFILL, ELGIN, ILLINOIS 9
2-3 SITE LAYOUT, TRI-COUNTY LANDFILL, ELGIN, ILLINOIS 10
4-1 MATCON™ LINER AND COVER SYSTEM 19
4-2 LOCATION OF DRAINAGE AND METERING PIT 20
4-3 MATCON™ LINER AND COVER SYSTEM CROSS-SECTIONS A-A AND B-B' 21
4-4 DITCH CROSS-SECTION 22
4-5 MONITORING PIT/FRENCH DRAIN 23
4-6 MATCON™ LINER AND COVER SYSTEM LEAK DETECTION SUMP 25
4-7 PLAN VIEW OF THE MATCON™ COVER 26
4-8 SECTION A-A 27
4-9 SECTION B-B' 28
4-10 SAMPLING AREA LOCATIONS 31
4-11 CURVES SHOWING DEFLECTION VS. TIME 40
4-12 FRACTURE STRESS (MPa) AND TEMPERATURE (C) FOR MATCON™
AND CONVENTIONAL MATERIAL 42
Tables
2-1 SUPERFUND FEASIBILITY EVALUATION CRITERIA FOR THE
MATCON™ TECHNOLOGY 12
3-1 ESTIMATED COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH MATCON™ INSTALLATION 16
4-1 COVER SAMPLE TYPE, NUMBERS, AND LABELING - DAFB SITE 32
4-2 CHARACTERIZATION TESTING ON ASPHALT SAMPLES -DAFB SITE 33
4-3 ESTIMATED IN-FIELD PERMEABILITY OF MATCON™ COVER
DURING RAINFALL EVENTS 35
4-4 STATISTICAL SUMMARY OF LABORATORY DATA 36
4-5 TENSILE PROPERTIES FOR BINDER AND MIXTURE AT COLD TEMPERATURES 40
VII
-------
Acronyms, Abbreviations, and Symbols
ASHTO
AMRL
ARAR
ASTM
cm/sec
COE
CQC
DAFB
DLS
EPA
HOPE
ITER
MPa
NRMRL
ORD
OSWER
PG
PRI
PVC
QA
QC
RCRA
RPD
SARA
SITE
TCL
TEP/QAPP
TER
UV
wcc
WMI
American Society of State Highway and Transportation Officials
Asphalt Materials Reference Library
Applicable or relevant and appropriate requirement
American Society for Testing and Materials
Centimeters per second
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Construction quality control
Dover Air Force Base
Drainage layer sump
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
High-density polyethylene
Innovative Technology Evaluation Program
Megapascal
National Risk Management Research Laboratory
EPA Office of Research and Development
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response
Performance grade
PRI Asphalt Technologies, Inc.
Polyvinyl chloride
Quality assurance
Quality control
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
Relative percent difference
Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986
Superfund Innovative Technology Evaluation
Tri-County Landfill
Technology Evaluation Plan/Quality Assurance Project Plan
Technology Evaluation Report
Ultraviolet
Wilder Construction Company
Waste Management, Inc.
VIM
-------
Conversions
To Convert From
To
Multiply By
Length
Area:
Volume:
inch
foot
mile
square foot
acre
gallon
cubic foot
centimeter
meter
kilometer
square meter
square meter
liter
cubic meter
2.54
0.305
1.61
0.0929
4,047
3.78
0.0283
Mass:
pound
kilogram
0.454
Energy:
kilowatt-hour
megajoule
3.60
Power:
kilowatt
horsepower
1.34
Temperature:
("Fahrenheit - 32) "Celsius
0.556
IX
-------
Acknowledgments
This report was prepared under the direction of Mr. David Carson, the Environmental Protection Agency Super-
fund Innovative Technology Evaluation Program project manager at EPA's National Risk Management Resource
Laboratory in Cincinnati, Ohio. Contributors and reviewers for this report were Dr. Ronald Terrel of Terrel
Research in Edmonds, Washington; Mr. Karl Yost of Wilder Construction Company in Everett, Washington; and
Kenneth Grzybowski of PRI Asphalt Technologies, Inc., in Tampa, Florida. Gregory Jackson of Dover Air Force
Base and Mike Peterson of Waste Management, Inc., provided invaluable field support during the demonstrations.
-------
Executive Summary
Hazardous waste has been contained at several Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) and Superfund
sites around the country for the past 20 years using clay
and geosynthetic covers. These covers often do not allow
site reuse for industrial or commercial development.
With the growing need to redevelop Brownfields sites
(contaminated sites in urban areas), covers that allow
industrial or commercial use are preferred. Wilder
Construction Company (WCC) of Everett, Washington, has
developed the MatCon™ (Modified Asphalt Technology
for Waste Containment) technology for covers, which
allows site reuse at hazardous waste sites. In 1998, WCC
requested the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) to evaluate this technology under the Superfund
Innovative Technology Evaluation (SITE) Program at
Dover Air Force Base (DAFB) in Dover, Delaware. In
1999, the evaluation was expanded to also include the Tri-
County Landfill (TCL) Superfund site in Elgin, Illinois.
This Innovative Technology Evaluation Report (ITER)
presents the details of the evaluation and the performance
data obtained at the DAFB and TCL sites. The following
sub-sections describe the sites and evaluation procedures,
list objectives and summarize associated results, and
provide conclusions.
Dover Air Force Base Site
The Matcon™ cover installed at the DAFB covered
an area of 124 x 220 feet (ft). The installation was
completed in April 1999, and samples were collected
in August 1999. The Matcon™ cover at the DAFB site
consisted of three, hydraulically independent sections;
Section I was a 12-inch-thick section (one 4-inch-thick
open graded MatCon™ layer serving as a drainage layer
between two 4-inch-thick layers of MatCon™; Section II
was a 4-inch-thick MatCon™ layer; and Section III was
a 4-inch-thick layer of conventional asphalt. Perforated
high density polyethylene (HOPE) pipes were placed
in the open graded MatCon™ layer within Section I to
convey water infiltrating the MatCon™ cover to a sump
at the edge of the cover.
Several cores and slab samples of the MatCon™ and
conventional asphalt covers were collected from this site
to compare the following laboratory-measured properties
of MatCon™ with conventional asphalt.
• Hydraulic permeability
• Flexural properties
• Joint integrity
• Load capacity
• Tensile strength
• Thermal crack resistence
• Permeability after 30 and 60 days of accelerated
weathering
• Fuel resistance
• Void space
• Aggregate properties
• Hydraulic transmissivity of the drainage layer (open
graded MatCon™)
In addition, field permeability was calculated by
measuring the infiltration through the MatCon™ cover
during precipitation events. Field permeability tests were
performed on Section I at the DAFB site.
-------
Tri-County Landfill Site
A 3.6-acre (14,569-square meter [m2]) MatCon™ cover
was installed at the TCL site in November 1999 adjacent
to the recycling facilities of Waste Management, Inc. The
thickness of the MatCon™ cover was 4 inches (10 cm) over
most of the area except the lysimeter test section (30 feet
by 80 feet [9.2 by 24.2 m]), which consisted of 2 inches
(5 cm) of conventional asphalt overlain by 40-millimeter-
thick geomembrane and geotextile, 6 inches (15 cm) of
coarse aggregate, and 4 inches (10 cm) of MatCon™ cover.
A 3-inch-diameter (7.6-cm) perforated HDPE drainage
pipe was placed in the 6-inch-thick (15-cm) aggregate
section to convey the infiltration into the MatCon™ cover
to a sump at the edge of the cover. This variation in the
drainage layer design from what was used at the DAFB
site was requested by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,
the supervisor of the remediation at the TCL site.
Laboratory samples were collected from locations
away from the lysimeter test section. These samples
were tested for void space, aggregate properties, and
hydraulic permeability. In April 2000, further sampling
was completed at an area of the cover where a crack was
observed. WCC determined that the crack was due to a
cold joint formed because of poor workmanship during
the November installation (see Section 4.1.3.2). The
crack was repaired, and a procedure for construction of
cold joints was developed (Appendix B).
Field permeability was also calculated at the TCL site by
measuring the infiltration through the MatCon™ cover
during precipitation events and constant-exposure ponding
tests. Field permeability tests were performed on the
demonstration portion of the cover at this site.
Objectives and Results
The technology demonstration objectives and results are
described below.
• Primary objective 1: Determine if the MatCon™
cover exhibits a field permeability of less than the
RCRA Subtitle C requirement of 10~7 centimeters
per second (cm/sec). At the DAFB site, the field
permeability values of the MatCon™ cover varied
from 1.28 x 10~7 cm/sec to 1.31 x 10~8 cm/sec. A 6-
hour ponding test indicated a permeability of 1.25 x
10"8 cm/sec.
At the TCL site, the field permeability of the
MatCon™ cover varied from 3.36 x 10~9 cm/sec to
5.15 x 10'10 cm/sec based on drainage measurements
during precipitation events. A 48-hour ponding test
on the cover yielded a permeability value of 5.0 x
10"8 cm/sec.
Primary objective 2: Compare the laboratory-
measured permeability and flexural properties of the
MatCon™ cover with the conventional asphalt cover
at the DAFB site. At the DAFB site, the laboratory
permeability of the MatCon™ cover was less than
1.0 x 10"8 cm/sec, whereas the permeability of
conventional asphalt varied from 1.04 to 2.75 x 10~4
cm/sec. At the TCL site, the laboratory permeability
of the MatCon™ cores was less than 1.0 x 10~8 cm/sec,
except for the cores obtained on the crack described
above, which had a permeability of 3.5 6 x 10~5 cm/sec.
The cores obtained on the crack had a void content
of 8.2 percent, compared to less than 3 percent for
properly installed MatCon.™
A 36-inch-long beam of MatCon™ asphalt sustained
20.41 millimeter (mm) of deflection without cracking,
whereas a conventional asphalt beam cracked at 7 to
10 mm deflection. The conventional asphalt beam
showed 3-mm wide, 2.5-cm long cracks at about 25
mm of deflection.
Secondary objective 1: Compare other laboratory-
measured physical properties of the MatCon™ cover
and the conventional asphalt cover at the DAFB
site. The resilient modulus of the MatCon™ cover
was 2,048 megapascals (Mpa), compared to 3,200
Mpa for the conventional asphalt cover at cold
temperatures (-20 degrees C). This reduced modulus
suggests that MatCon™ is more flexible and less
susceptible to cracking at cold temperatures.
The tensile strength of the MatCon™ cover was 3.551
Mpa, compared to 2.579 Mpa for the conventional
asphalt cover. The fracture temperature of the
MatCon™ cover was 4.3 degrees Celsius lower than
the conventional asphalt cover.
The MatCon™ cover had a 37 percent higher fracture
strength than conventional asphalt.
The accelerated aging tests indicated that the
MatCon™ cover was essentially unaffected by
exposure to ultraviolet light, maintaining the same
PG rating after 60 days of aging, whereas the
conventional asphalt binder lost both high and low
temperature performance on exposure to ultraviolet
light. However, the permeability of the MatCon™
cover increased by an average of two orders of
magnitude after accelerated aging (2.2 x 10~6 cm/sec).
The permeability of the conventional cover remained
generally unchanged (3.15 x 10~4 cm/sec).
Exposure to cyclic water sprays for 60 days had
a minimal effect on the binder properties of the
MatCon™ cover, and the MatCon™ binder had wider
performance grade as compared to the conventional
asphalt binder.
-------
Exposure to fuel degraded the top 1.5 cm (out of a
total of 10-cm thickness) of the MatCon,™ cover,
whereas the conventional asphalt cover showed 5.5
cm degradation (out of a total of 10-cm thickness).
• Secondary objective 2: Determine whether extreme
weather conditions or vehicle loads affect the field
performance of the MatCon™ cover. The MatCon™
surface performed well under extreme cold weather
conditions and significant vehicle loads at the Tri-
County Landfill site. The MatCon™ surface was
used for parking recycling vehicles and garbage
trucks from the day the cover was installed.
• Secondary objective 3: Estimate a cumulative
hydrologic balance for the MatCon™ cover over
the period of the demonstration at the DAFB site.
A hydrologic balance could not be performed at the
DAFB site.
• Secondary objective 4: Estimate the cost for
constructing the MatCon™ cover and maintaining
the cover for the duration of the demonstration. The
cost of MatCon™ cover installation is estimated to
be $124,000 to $140,000 per acre including subgrade
preparations. This is comparable to the cost of RCRA
Subtitle D covers and less than the cost per acre of
RCRA Subtitle C covers, which range from $150,000
to $300,000, depending on the local availability of
appropriate cover materials (Dwyer 1998).
Conclusions
The demonstrations at the DAFB and TCL sites indicate
that the MatCon™ cover is suitable for use as a low
permeability cover at hazardous waste sites. Based on the
results of the test plots, the permeability of the MatCon™
cover was lower than or equal to the 1.0 x 10~7 cm/sec
requirement for hazardous waste landfill covers. The
demonstrated MatCon™ covers performed well under
extreme cold weather conditions and under use as a staging
area for heavy vehicles.
The MatCon™ cover permits site reuse. The main
limitations of the technology are that it cannot be used
at sites having slopes greater than 3 to 1 or at sites that
cannot provide a firm and unyielding subgrade to support
the paving equipment used to install the cover.
-------
Section 1
Introduction
This section briefly describes the SITE Program and
SITE reports; states the purpose and organization of
this ITER; provides background information regarding
the development of the MatCon™ process technology;
identifies wastes to which this technology may be applied;
and provides a list of key contacts who can supply
information about the technology and demonstration
site.
1.1 Description of SITE Program and Re-
ports
This section briefly describes the purpose, history, and
goals of the SITE Program, and the reports that document
SITE demonstration results.
7.7.7 Purpose, History, and Goals of the SITE
Program
The primary purpose of the SITE Program is to advance
the development and demonstration, and thereby establish
the commercial availability, of innovative treatment
technologies applicable to Superfund and other hazardous
waste sites. The SITE Program was established by the
EPA Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response
(OSWER) and Office of Research and Development
(ORD) in response to the Superfund Amendments and
Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA), which recognized
the need for an alternative or innovative treatment
technology research and demonstration program. The
SITE Program is administered by ORD's National
Risk Management Resource Laboratory (NRMRL).
The overall goal of the SITE Program is to carry out a
program of research, evaluation, testing, development,
and demonstration of alternative or innovative treatment
technologies that may be used in response actions to
achieve long-term protection of human health and welfare
and the environment.
The SITE Program includes the following elements:
• The MMT Program evaluates innovative technologies
that sample, detect, monitor, or measure hazardous
and toxic substances. These technologies are
expected to provide better, faster, or more cost-
effective methods for producing real-time data during
site characterization and remediation studies than do
conventional technologies.
• The Remediation Technology Program conducts
demonstrations of innovative treatment technologies
to provide reliable performance, cost, and applicability
data for site cleanups.
• The Technology Transfer Program provides and
disseminates technical information in the form
of updates, brochures, and other publications
that promote the SITE Program and participating
technologies. The Technology Transfer Program also
offers technical assistance, training, and workshops
to support the technologies. A significant number of
these activities are performed by EPA's Technology
Innovation Office.
Innovative technologies chosen for a SITE demonstration
must be pilot- or full-scale applications and must offer some
advantage over conventional technologies. To produce
useful and reliable data, demonstrations are conducted
at actual hazardous waste sites or under conditions that
closely simulate actual waste site conditions.
Data collected during the demonstration are used to
assess the performance of the technology, the potential
need for pretreatment and post-treatment processing of
the treated waste, the types of wastes and media that can
be treated by the technology, potential treatment system
operating problems, and approximate capital and operating
costs. Demonstration data can also provide insight into
a technology's long-term operation and maintenance
(O&M) costs and long-term application risks.
-------
Under each SITE demonstration, a technology's
performance in treating an individual waste at a particular
site is evaluated. Successful demonstration of a technology
at one site does not ensure its successes at other sites.
Data obtained from the demonstration may require
extrapolation to estimate a range of operating conditions
over which the technology performs satisfactorily. Any
extrapolation of demonstration data also should be based
on other information about the technology, such as case
study information.
Cooperative arrangements between EPA, the site owner,
and the technology developer establish responsibilities
for conducting the demonstration and evaluating the
technology. EPA is responsible for project planning,
sampling and analysis, quality assurance and quality
control (QA/QC), preparing reports, and disseminating
information. The site owner is responsible fortransporting
and disposing of treated waste materials and site logistics.
The technology developer is responsible for demonstrating
the technology at the selected site and is expected to
pay any costs for transport, operations, and removal of
equipment.
Implementation of the SITE Program is a significant,
ongoing effort involving ORD, OSWER, various EPA
regions, and private business concerns, including
technology developers and parties responsible for site
remediation. The technology selection process and the
Demonstration Program together provide a means to
perform objective and carefully controlled testing of
field-ready technologies. Each year, the SITE Program
sponsors about 10 technology demonstrations. This ITER
was prepared under the SITE Demonstration Program.
7.7.2 Documentation of Site Demonstration
Results
The results of each SITE demonstration are usually
reported in four documents: (1) a Demonstration Bulletin,
(2) a Technology Capsule, (3) a Technology Evaluation
Report (TER), and (4) the ITER. The Demonstration
Bulletin provides atwo-page description of the technology
and project history, notification that the demonstration was
completed, and highlights of the demonstration results.
The Technology Capsule provides a brief description of
the project and an overview of the demonstration results
and conclusions.
The purpose of the TER is to consolidate all information
and records acquired during the demonstration. The TER
data tables and graphs summarize test results in terms of
whether project objectives and applicable or relevant and
appropriate requirements (ARAR) were met. The tables
also summarize QA/QC data in comparison to data quality
objectives. The TER is not formally published by EPA.
Instead, a copy is retained by the EPA project manager
as a reference for responding to public inquiries and for
record-keeping purposes. The purpose and organization
of the ITER are discussed in Section 1.2.
1.2 Purpose and Organization of the ITER
Information presented in the ITER is intended to assist
decision-makers in evaluating specific technologies for
a particular cleanup situation. The ITER represents a
critical step in the development and commercialization
of a technology demonstrated under the SITE Program.
The ITER discusses the effectiveness and applicability
of the technology and analyses costs associated with its
application. The technology's effectiveness is evaluated
based on data collected during the SITE demonstration
and from other case studies. The applicability of the
technology is discussed in terms of waste and site
characteristics that could affect technology performance,
material handling requirements, technology limitations,
and other factors.
This ITER consists of six sections, including this
introduction. Sections 2 through 6 and their contents are
summarized below.
• Section 2, Treatment Applications Analysis,
discusses information relevant to the application
of the MatCon™ process technology, including an
assessment of the technology related to the nine
feasibility study evaluation criteria, potentially
applicable environmental regulations, and the
operability and limitations of the technology.
• Section 3, Economic Analysis, summarizes the actual
costs, by cost category, associated with using the
MatCon™ process technology, variables that may
affect costs at other sites, and conclusions derived
from the economic analysis.
• Section 4, Technology Effectiveness, presents
information relevant to the design and implementation
of the technology. It also presents an overview of
the SITE demonstration objectives, documents the
demonstration procedures, and summarizes the
results and conclusions of the demonstration.
• Section 5, Technology Status, summarizes the
developmental status of the MatCon™ process
technology.
• Section 6, References, lists the references used to
prepare this ITER.
-------
In addition to these sections, this ITERhas two appendices:
Appendix A, Vendor's Claims for the Technology and
Appendix B, Vendor's Discussion of MatCon™ Cold
Joints.
1.3 Matcon™Technology Description
MatCon™, an abbreviation for Modified Asphalt
Technology for Waste Containment, is a technology
developed by Wilder Construction Company (WCC)
to contain hazardous wastes at RCRA and Superfund
sites. The MatCon™ asphalt mix contains high quality,
specifically sized mineral aggregate and a highly
modified proprietary binder using additives beneficial to
environmental applications. The binder content is about
7 percent, and the air void content is less than 3 percent
compared to an air void content of about 8 percent for
conventional asphalt mixes.
The MatCon™ mix, when properly installed using high
quality paving techniques, offers unique advantages over
conventional asphalt. The permeability of MatCon™ is
less than 10~7 cm/sec, and it offers greater resilience and
longevity than conventional asphalt. The first MatCon™
cover was installed in Ferndale, Washington in 1989.
The advantages claimed by WCC for the MatCon™
technology include the following.
• MatCon™ does not crack like compacted clay and
is not subject to damage under ultraviolet light
exposure
• MatCon™ resists corrosion and conforms well
to small differential settlement of underlying
materials
• MatCon™ cover thicknesses vary from 4 to 12 inches
(10 to 30.5 cm) compared to conventional RCRA
covers, which are over 3 feet (0.9 meter) thick
• MatCon™ can be rapidly installed on a prepared
subgrade (about 1.5 acres per day [0.6 hectares per
day]) and used immediately after installation
• A large number of asphalt paving contractors in
the country have the skill, equipment, and trained
personnel to install MatCon™ according to WCC
specifications
During a typical MatCon™ cover installation, WCC
brings its proprietary binder to a local asphalt plant
and provides supervision for hot mix preparation. The
MatCon™ asphalt mix is then placed as a cover under
strict assurance QC specifications provided by WCC. A
4-inch thick (10-cm), highly permeable (about 1 x 10~2
cm/sec) drainage layer made of open graded MatCon™
is sandwiched between two 4-inch thick (10-cm) layers
of impermeable MatCon™ mix to create a double lined
version of the system.
1.4 Key Contacts
Additional information on the MatCon™ covertechnology
is available from the following sources.
David Carson
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Research and Development
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
Telephone: (513) 569-7527
FAX: (513) 569-7879
email: carson.david@epa.gov
Karl Yost or Jerry Thayer
Wilder Construction Company
1525 E. Marine View Drive
Everett, WA 98201
Telephone: (425) 551-3100
FAX: (425) 551-3116
email: karlyost@wilderconstruction.com
jerrytha@wilderconstruction.com
Gregory D. Jackson, P.E. (DAFB site contact)
Environmental Engineer
436 CES/CEV
600 Chevron Avenue
Dover Air Force Base, DE 19902-6600
Telephone: (302) 677-6846
FAX: (302) 677-6837
email: gregory.jackson@dover.af.mil
Michael Peterson (TCL site contact)
Waste Management, Inc.
West 124 North 9355 Boundary Rd.
Menominee Falls, WI 53051
Telephone: (262) 253-8626, ext. 115
FAX: (262) 255-3798
email: mpeterson@wastemanagement.com
-------
Section 2
Technology Applications Analysis
This section describes the SITE demonstration objectives
and evaluation design conclusions, including the
demonstration results, factors influencing the effectiveness
of the MatCon™ technology, personnel requirements,
potential regulatory requirements, and appropriate waste
and site conditions. The vendor's claims regarding the
applicability and performance of the technology are
included in Appendix A. The technology's applicability
is based on the results of two demonstrations conducted
underthe SITE Program. The SITE demonstration results
are presented in detail in the TER.
2.1 SITE Demonstration Objectives and
Conclusions
The SITE demonstrations were conducted at DAFB in
Dover, Delaware (Figure 2-1) and TCL in Elgin, Illinois
(Figures 2-2 and 2-3), where contaminated site capping
was in progress. WCC (1998) provides details of WCC's
demonstration program application for the DAFB site.
The objectives of the two demonstrations are described
below.
Each of the project objectives is listed below and identified
as either primary (P) or secondary (S). Primary obj ectives
were considered critical for the technology evaluation,
and secondary objectives provided additional useful
information. For each objective, a brief description
of the experimental approach is given. Details of the
experimental approach and results are given in Section
4.0.
Two primary objectives were identified:
PI—Determine if the MatCon™ cover exhibits a field
permeability of less than the RCRA Subtitle C requirement
of 10~7 centimeters per second (cm/sec) (CFR, 2002).
To estimate the field permeability of the MatCon™ cover,
the volume of infiltration during individual rainfall events
was measured during the demonstration period at each
of the two sites.
Using Darcy's Law, the measured infiltration rates
were converted into estimates of field permeability,
and these estimates were compared to the regulatory
requirement. Field permeability was calculated as
the hydraulic conductivity of the installed cover, and
reported in the units cm/sec. Although the terms
permeabilityand hydraulic conductivity are typically
defined separately, the terms are considered to be
interchangeable for the purpose of discussion of this
demonstration.
P2—Compare the laboratory-measured permeability
andflexural properties of the MatCon™ cover and the
conventional asphalt cover at the DAFB site.
The vendor claims that the MatCon™ cover is less
permeable and has superior flexural properties when
compared to conventional asphalt. To test these claims,
laboratory tests that evaluate the two properties were
conducted on both MatCon™ and conventional asphalt
samples from the DAFB site. Results for each parameter
were then compared to determine whether the MatCon™
cover appears to be superior to conventional asphalt for
these two critical parameters.
Four secondary objectives were identified:
SI—Compare other laboratory-measured physical
properties of the MatCon™ cover and the conventional
asphalt cover at the DAFB site.
The vendor makes no specific claim for the superiority
of MatCon™ to conventional asphalt with respect to
physical parameters, other than permeability and flexural
properties. However, differences in other physical
properties that can be measured in the laboratory may be
of interest to potential users. Therefore, samples of both
7
-------
Dover
Air Force
Base
Dover
Family
Housing
Annex
Figure 2-1. Location of Dover Air Force Base.
-------
1/2
SCALE 1:24000
0
1 MILE
1000
1000 2000 3000 4000 SOOO 6000 7000 FEET
LEGEND
SCALE: 1" - 2,000'
^^^m Primary Highway
Light-Duty Road
=: = Unimproved Rood
—<—i- Railroad
NOTE' All pink shading represents
residential areas.
SOURCE: MODIFIED FROM USGS,
GENEVA, ILLINOIS, QUADRANGLE, 1993
Quad
/I
ILLINOIS
\J
rangle Location
WATCON™ TECHNOLOGY EVALUATION
TRI-COUNTY LANDFILL
ELGIN, ILLINOIS
FIGURE 2-2
SITE LOCATION
G3 TetraTech EM Inc.
Figure 2-2. Site location, Tri-County Landfill, Elgin, Illinois.
-------
SOURCE: Modified from Montgomery Watson 1999
150' 0 ISO' 300"
SCALE: 1" = 300'
Figure 2-3. Site layout, Tri-County Landfill, Elgin, Illinois.
10
-------
the MatCon™ cover and the conventional cover were
collected from the DAFB site and analyzed for various
parameters pertinent to the physical performance of the
cover. Results for each parameter were then compared
to determine potential significant differences between the
two types of covers.
S2—Determine whether extreme weather conditions or
vehicle loads affect the field performance of the MatCon™
cover.
To evaluate this objective, the MatCon™ covers at both
sites were inspected periodically in the field, particularly
following periods of extreme cold or other adverse weather
conditions, to assess the development of potential cracks
or surface defects. These field inspections were used to
evaluate the effects of extreme weather or vehicle loads
since the previous inspection. General information on use
of the covers and on recent weather events was collected
from the site owners and evaluated against any surface
defects noted in the field inspections. The TCL site in
Elgin, Illinois encountered much colder temperatures than
the DAFB site in Dover, Delaware. As a result, data on
the impacts of extreme cold were observed only at the
TCL site.
S3—Estimate a cumulative hydrologic balance for the
MatCon™ cover over the period of the demonstration at
the DAFB site.
A hydrologic balance for the cover system was estimated
at the DAFB site. The hydrologic balance was based on
cumulative precipitation, totalized surface runoff, and
subsurface drainage during the demonstration period.
S4—Estimate the cost for constructing the MatCon™
cover and maintaining the cover for the duration of the
demonstration.
The capital and operating costs for the MatCon™ cover
technology, as demonstrated at both the DAFB and TCL
sites, were estimated based on the following 12 cost
categories: site and facility preparation cost; permitting
and regulatory costs; equipment costs; labor costs;
consumables and supplies costs; startup and fixed costs;
utilities costs; effluent treatment and disposal costs;
residual and waste shipping, handling, and transportation
costs; analytical costs; facility modification, repair,
and replacement costs; and site restoration costs. Cost
information obtained from WCC was reviewed by Tetra
Tech in preparing the cost estimate.
2.2 Feasibility Study Evaluation Criteria
The MatCon™ technology performance demonstrated at
the DAFB and TCL sites satisfied the nine criteria used
for determining its feasibility for Superfund sites. Table
2-1 summarizes the performance of the technology with
respect to each of the nine feasibility criteria for application
at Superfund sites. Further analysis of MatCon™
performance is provided in the following sections.
2.2.1 Overall Protection of Human Health
and the Environment
Hazardous waste landfills may adversely impact human
health and the environment by producing airborne
contamination and hazardous leachate. The MatCon™
cover provides complete containment of the hazardous
waste and limits these adverse impacts. It has been
successfully implemented at the DAFB and TCL sites
and at McClelland Air Force Base in California.
2.2.2 Compliance with Applicable or Rele-
vant and Approriate Requirements
The primary ARAR for source control at hazardous waste
landfills is the RCRA Subtitle C permeability requirement
of 10'7 cm/sec for hazardous waste landfills. The
demonstrations at the DAFB and TCL sites have shown
that the permeability of the MatCon™ cover is less than
10~7 cm/sec. Therefore, the MatCon™technology satisfies
the ARARs for hazardous waste landfills.
2.2.3 Long-Term Effectiveness and
Permanence
Testing of various physical properties, such as fracture
strength and resistance to accelerated weathering, has
indicated that the MatCon™ cover is more durable than
conventional asphalt, and can be a permanent containment
system requiring limited maintenance. WCC installed the
first MatCon™ cover over incinerator ash in Ferndale,
Washington in 1989. This site was not evaluated as part
of this demonstration; however, WCC claims that this
cover has maintained a 10~8 cm/sec permeability over
the past 12 years, even though the cover has been used
as an active work surface for heavy equipment operation
and material staging. The cover has required little or no
maintenance over this long period, demonstrating the long-
term effectiveness of the MatCon™ cover. The MatCon™
mix is made of natural and recyclable materials (aggregates
and modified asphalt) that are used extensively in the
11
-------
Table 2-1. Superfund Feasibility Evaluation Criteria for the MatCon™ Technology
Criterion
Discussion
Overall protection of human health
and the environment
Compliance with applicable or
relevant and appropriate
requirements (ARAR)
Long-term effectiveness and
permanence
Reduction of toxicity, mobility, or
volume through treatment
Short-term effectiveness
Implementability
Cost
State acceptance
Community acceptance
1. The MatCon™ technology is expected to protect human health
by containing the hazardous waste. It affords environmental
protection by preventing the formation of leachate at
hazardous waste landfills.
2. The MatCon™ technology complies with the RCRA Subtitle
C permeability requirement of 10-7 cm/sec for hazardous
waste landfill covers. It also complies with state and local
ARARs.
3. Testing of various physical properties, such as fracture
strength and resistance to accelerated weathering, has
indicated that the MatCon™ cover can be a permanent
containment system requiring limited maintenance. The
technology uses natural and recyclable materials (aggregates
and modified asphalt) that are used extensively in the
construction industry.
4. The technology reduces the mobility of hazardous waste by
reducing infiltration at landfill sites and does not involve waste
treatment; therefore, this criterion is satisfied.
5. A MatCon™ cover can be constructed within a few weeks and
can reduce infiltration immediately following installation. The
technology can be implemented expeditiously and is effective
in preventing water infiltration into the waste.
6. The technology is readily implementable since hot mix plants
are available in all parts of the country. Standard, readily
available paving equipment can be used
7. The cost is often less than RCRA Subtitle C clay and
geosynthetic covers. Potential beneficial reuse of the site is a
very attractive feature of the technology.
8. The technology has been approved in several states, including
Delaware, Illinois, Texas, California, Florida, Washington,
and others because of the redevelopment possibilities with a
MatCon™ cover.
9. Community acceptance of the technology is likely because of
the redevelopment possibilities with a MatCon™ cover.
12
-------
construction industry, which should result in permanence
of the MatCon™ cover.
2.2.4 Reduction of Toxicity, Mobility, or
Volume Through Treatment
The MatCon™ technology does not involve treatment
of waste or contaminated material; therefore, it cannot
reduce toxicity or volume through treatment. However,
the MatCon™ cover reduces the mobility of contaminants
in the landfill by minimizing entry of water into the
waste; as a result, leachate production and migration is
minimized.
2.2.5 Short-Term Effectiveness
Depending on the size of the cover required, the MatCon™
technology can be installed in as little as one day, to within
a few weeks and immediately prevents entry of water into
the waste. Therefore, the MatCon™technology provides
short-term effectiveness by minimizing formation of
leachate.
2.2.5 Implementability
The ease of implementation is an attractive feature of the
MatCon™ technology. The proprietary binder is shipped
to the hot mix plant nearest to the site, and the mix is
prepared under WCC supervision. Paving equipment
available from local paving contractors can be used to
install the MatCon™ cover in a few weeks.
2.2.7 Cost
The installation cost varies from $124,000 to $140,000
per acre and is less than that for RCRA Subtitle C clay
and geosynthetic covers. In addition, the time required
to install the MatCon™ cover is significantly less than
that for clay and geosynthetic covers. Mobilization
and demobilization costs are also less than for clay and
geosynthetic covers.
2.2.8 State Acceptance
MatCon™ has been included in state-approved design
specifications of landfill covers installed at sites in the
states of California, Colorado, Delaware, Florida, Illinois,
Kentucky, New Mexico, Texas, and Washington. Approval
is based on the low permeability of the cover and the
redevelopment or reuse possibilities for the MatCon™
cover surface.
2.2.9 Community Acceptance
The states mentioned in Section 2.2.8 approved the
MatCon™ cover because of community acceptance
for site redevelopment at closed landfills. The ease of
maintenance for the MatCon™ cover is also attractive
to communities.
2.3 Technology Applicability
The MatCon™ technology can be used as a final cover
at many hazardous waste sites where a firm foundation
is available or can be constructed. The MatCon™ cover
offers a major advantage over RCRA Subtitle C or D
covers when site reuse is planned. The following are a
few of the site reuse possibilities:
• Parking or staging area for equipment and vehicles
• Material processing and treatment pads
• Petroleum hydrocarbon-resistant surface for fueling
operations
• Light industrial manufacturing and warehousing
• Sports facilities, such as tennis courts and running
tracks
The MatCon™ cover at the TCL site has been used as a
staging area for garbage trucks and recycling vehicles since
the day it was installed. In addition, a large fuel oil tank
placed on the cover is used for fueling the vehicles.
The demonstrations at the DAFB and TCL sites have
proven the applicability of the technology in wet and
cold climates. An additional demonstration is planned
in 2003 at Kirtland Air Force Base in Albuquerque, New
Mexico.
2.4 Limitations of theTechnology
The limitations of the technology can be grouped under
three categories: site characteristics, quality control, and
extent of site reuse. These limitations are discussed in
the following subsections.
2.4.1 Site Characteristics
MatCon™ cover applications require the following site
conditions:
• The subgrade to receive the MatCon™ cover must
be firm and unyielding to support compaction of the
MatCon™ asphalt during construction.
13
-------
• The subgrade to receive the MatCon™ cover must
have slopes of less than 3:1 (heightvolume) for the
safe use of compacting and paving equipment during
installation.
• The subgrade to receive MatCon™ must have a slope
of greater than 1.5 percent to facilitate drainage and
minimize surface water ponding.
• The subgrade must be constructed to a grading
tolerance of plus or minus 0.5 inch (1.3 cm).
2.4.2 Quality Control
The MatCon™ cover has to be prepared and installed under
strict quality assurance (QA) procedures in accordance
with WCC's specifications and construction QAprogram.
The MatCon™ mix must be produced in a local hot mix
plant under the WCC QA program.
2.4.3 Site Reuse
Though heavy surface use on a MatCon™ cover is
possible, heavy container stacking, extraordinarily
heavy or repeated loads, sharp point source loading,
misuse, or use of heavy tracked equipment might
compromise its integrity. Such heavy surface uses can be
accommodated through customized designs, formulations,
and construction methods. WCC prepares site specific
Operations and Maintenance Plans for each installation
and the potential future surface uses.
14
-------
Section 3
Economic Analysis
The primary purpose of this economic analysis is to
estimate costs of utilizing the MatCon™ cover to provide
source control at hazardous waste sites. Site-specific
factors affecting cost, the basis of the economic analysis,
cost categories, and cost per acre of MatCon™ installation
are described below.
Costs have been divided into four categories that are
applicable to this technology. The four categories are:
• Site preparation
• Permitting and regulatory
• Labor
• Supplies and consumables
Table 3-1 shows the estimated costs for preparing the
MatCon™ mix and installing the cover on one acre.
The following eight categories typically associated with
cleanup activities at Superfund and RCRA-corrective
action sites are not applicable to the MatCon™
technology.
• Capital equipment
• Startup costs
• Demobilization
• Utility costs
• Effluent treatment and disposal
• Residuals and waste shipping and handling
• Equipment maintenance and modifications
• Analytical and monitoring costs
MatCon™ is a containment system technology, not
a treatment technology that reduces waste toxicity.
The equipment used to install the MatCon™ cover
is conventional paving equipment, and this task is
subcontracted by the project owner, engineer, or WCC
to a qualified local paving contractor. Therefore, no
startup, demobilization, or capital equipment costs are
involved. The cost of equipment (capital and operating)
for a MatCon™ installation cannot be separated out from
the total equipment costs of the paving contractor and is
included in the labor overhead under labor costs.
MatCon™ cover installation does not require separate
utility costs, and the fuel required to run the paving
equipment is included in the labor costs charged by the
paving contractor. The technology does not treat waste;
therefore, no cost is associated with effluent treatment
and disposal, residual and waste shipping and handling,
or analytical and monitoring. The vendor-specified
construction quality control (CQC) testing is included in
the labor costs.
3.1 Site-Specific Factors Affecting Costs
Two site-specific factors impact the cost of MatCon™
cover installation. These are (1) physical site conditions
related to the subgrade and (2) geographical location,
which affects transportation costs for the hot mix and
paving contractor costs. The size of the paved area did
not have much impact on the cost per acre for MatCon™
installation.
The variation in costs due to physical conditions at the
site is demonstrated in costs incurred at the DAFB and
TCL sites. The subgrade at the TCL site was constructed
over municipal waste and required 8 inches (20 cm) of
crushed rock, compared to 6 inches (15 cm) at the DAFB
site (a difference of $3,000 per acre). Labor costs and
cost of supplies were also less at DAFB compared to the
15
-------
Table 3-1. Estimated Costs Associated With MatCon™ Installation
Estimated Cost Per
Cost Category Acre
(Dollars)
Site preparation 7,000 to 10,000
Permitting and regulatory 2,000
Startup 0
Labor 35,000 to 45,000
Supply and consumables 80,000 to 83,000
Utilities 0
Effluent treatment and disposal 0
Residual and waste shipping and handling 0
Analytical and monitoring 0
Maintenance and modifications 0
Demobilization 0
Total cost per acre 124,000 to 140,000
TCL site because of site proximity to the local asphalt • A qualified paving contractor is available in the
plant (a difference of $12,000 per acre). project area.
The costs presented in this analysis are based on conditions ' ^
at the DAFB and TCL sites. Because these costs were A dlscusslon of the four cost categories applicable to the
not independently verified at the sites, all costs presented MatCon™ cover installation and the elements associated
in this section were provided by WCC. with each category is provided below. These costs are
based on the costs per acre experienced by WCC at the
3.2 Basis of Economic Analysis DAFB and TCL Sltes
The following assumptions were made for this economic _, _, „ _. „
analysis 3 3 1 S,te Preparat.on
_ . . , , . , . „„ ., ,_„ , ., The costs associated with site preparation include grading
• Ine site is located within 20 miles (32 kilometers ., ,, <± . .• ?^ • i
[km]) of the asphalt plant. the surface to remove soft sPots' creatlon of the recluired
slope, and placing crushed rock subgrade to support the
• Suitable access roads are available. MatCon™ cover installation.
• The site has relatively firm soils with a bearing Sites that require a substantial amount of fill or reinforcing
capacity of about 1 ton per square foot. . -, . , ,, « u -nu
to repair sort spots and form a firm base will nave
• The site is relatively flat and dry. significantly higher site preparation costs. At the TCL
site, soils overlying municipal waste could be prepared by
16
-------
placing about 8 inches of crushed rock to form a suitable
subgrade. Costs at the DAFB site for site preparation
were somewhat lower because of a firmer base. The site
preparation costs ranged from $7,000to $10,000 per acre.
Site preparation is typically performed by a local civil
grading contractor.
3.3.2 Permitting and Regulatory Costs
These costs are dependent on the type of waste and the
environmental laws, regulations, and ordinances of federal,
state, and local jurisdictions. Because installation of the
MatCon™ cover provides source control and facilitates
site reuse, it is not expected to require much effort to
obtain the required permits. Permitting and regulatory
costs are estimated at $2,000 per acre.
3.3.3 Labor Costs
These costs include the cost of personnel at the asphalt
plant, for the truck drivers to transport the mix to the site,
for the crew required to lay and compact the mix at the
site, and supervisory personnel. The cost of equipment at
the asphalt plant and for the paving contractor are included
in the labor cost charged by the contractor. The 3.6-acre
(1.5-hectare) site at TCL required about two 10-hour days
to complete installation of the 4-inch-thick (10.2-cm)
MatCon™ cover. The DAFB costs were somewhat lower
because the asphalt plant was close to the site.
According to WCC, the labor costs for MatCon™
installation ranged from $35,000 to $45,000 per acre. Of
this amount, the cost of supervising personnel from WCC
and the site owners was 15 percent, cost of the field crew
was 5 0 percent, cost of the plant personnel was 20 percent,
and the cost of truck drivers was 10 percent.
3.3.4 Supplies and Consumables Costs
3.4 Cost Per Acre of Matcon™ Cover
Based on the cost breakdown discussed in Section 3.3,
the total cost per acre of MatCon™ cover ranges from
$124,000 to $140,000. At the time of this report, WCC's
published catalog price for the MatCon™ binder and
technical support (including mix design, technical support,
onsite MatCon™ Guide Specification CQC, and related
testing) is $77,400 per acre for a nominal 4-inch thick lift.
The difference between this and the $ 124,000 to $ 140,000
per acre estimate range is directly related to the cost of
the hot-mix aggregates, hot-mix blending, hot-mix haul
from the facility to the job site, lay-down and compaction.
This latter component ($39,600 to $54,600 per acre) is
a function of the local asphalt paving market forces and
proximity of the hot-mix plant to the job site.
This cost compares favorably with the cost per acre of
RCRA Subtitle C covers, which ranges from $250,000
to $350,000, depending on the local availability of
appropriate soil and drainage materials (Dwyer 1998).
Supplies and consumables costs include the cost of the
proprietary binder, bitumen and the aggregate s required to
prepare the hot mix. The proprietary binder is expensive
since it has not been widely used for hazardous waste
covers. According to WCC, the cost of the binder per acre
of cover is $77,400 (current published catalog pricing),
and the cost of aggregate and bitumen per acre ranges
from $3,000 to $10,000, depending on the local cost of
aggregate.
17
-------
Section 4
Technology Effectiveness
This section discusses the two SITE demonstrations
that were conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of the
MatCon™ technology. This discussion addresses the
construction of the MatCon™ covers, the measurements
that were completed to determine conventional asphalt
and MatCon,™ performance and the demonstration results
and conclusions.
4.1 Description of the Installed Covers
The installation of the MatCon™ cover and the field tests
at the DAFB and TCL sites are discussed below. The
locations of these two sites are shown in Figure 2-1 (DAFB
site) and in Figures 2-2 and 2-3 (TCL site).
4.7.7 DAFB Site
This section describes the cover at the DAFB site.
4.1.1.1 Cover Installation
WCC installed the MatCon™ cover system at DAFB in
April 1999. The cap covers 124 by 220 feet (38.4 by 67.1
meters) (see Figure 4-1). The cover consists of three,
hydraulically independent sections, as follows:
• Section I: 12-inch-thick (30.5-cm) MatCon™
• Section II: 4-inch-thick (10-cm) MatCon™
• Section III: 4-inch-thick (10-cm) conventional
asphalt
A subsurface drainage collection (leak detection) system
was constructed in Section I (Figure 4-2). The system
consists of a 4-inch-thick channel of open-graded
asphalt between two 4-inch-thick MatCon™ layers.
The subsurface drainage system divides Section I into
quadrants; the drainage layer beneath each quadrantflows
into a separate 3-inch-diameter (7.6-cm) high density
polyethylene (HOPE) pipe (Figure 4-3).
The area covered by the MatCon™ and conventional
asphalt is small, so no cold joints were required. An
elaborate design specification was not prepared for this
site.
WCC contracted with a local asphalt contractor to
construct the conventional asphalt and MatCon™ covers.
The 6-inch-thick (15-cm) subgrade was prepared with
crushed rock by DAFB personnel according to the
requirements of WCC. However, for the 12-inch-thick
(30-cm) MatCon™ section, no crushed rock was used
in the subgrade. The soil was compacted to the grade
specified by WCC, and the asphalt contractor placed
the 12-inch-thick (30-cm) MatCon™ section using the
material specified by WCC.
The installation was completed in about two days. WCC
provided the special binder to the local hot mix plant, and
the plant prepared the MatCon™ material according to the
specifications provided by WCC. WCC prepared a video
of the complete MatCon™ installation and submitted it
to EPA.
4.1.1.2 Drainage System
A drainage ditch, a metering pit, and a lysimeter sump
were installed during March 2000 to monitor runoff from
the cover and infiltration into the lysimeter section of the
cover. All hydrologic monitoring points were located on
the down gradient side of Section I of the cover.
To monitor surface runoff, a lined ditch was constructed
along the down gradient side of the cap, and berms were
constructed on three sides to direct the runoff into the
drainage ditch (Figure 4-4).
The ditch flows into a 4-ft by 4-ft by 4-ft deep (1.2- by
1.2- by 1.2-meter) metering pit (Figure 4-5). Flow into
the metering pit was measured with a flow meter prior to
surface discharge.
18
-------
12"MATCON™
with drainage layer
4" MATCON™
4" Conventional Paving Mix
-46'-
-74'-
^6" Base Course (gravel)
-100'
CD
I
12" MATCON™
3%
1%
\
II
4" MATCON™
1%
111
4" Conventional Paving Mix
4" High Barm
See Figure 2-2
for an enlargement
of Section I
Figure 4-1. MatCon™ liner and cover system.
-------
1X3
O
4" High Barm
B
1.5'
4'x4'x4'
Metering 2-Turbine
Flowmeter
LEGEND
| | Open Grade MATCON™
| | Dense Grade MATCON™
NOT TO SCALE
-124'-
-60'-
-60"-
-60-
-60'-
A'
3" HOPE
Drainage Layer
Manifold and
10" Collection Sump
Asphalt Lined
Drainage Ditch
B" Diameter
Drain Pipe
2,5'
B'
4'
MATCON™ TECHNOLOGY EVALUATION
DOVER AIR FORCE BASE
DOVER, DELAWARE
FIGURE 4-2
LOCATION OF DRAINAGE DITCH
AND METERING PIT
TETRA TECH EM INC
Figure 4-2. Location of drainage and metering pit.
-------
3%
LEAK DETECTION SYSTEM
:A) (A-;
,1%
LEGEND
OPEN GRADE MATCON™
DENSE GRADE MATCON™
- -^ ;•. •'<"
• • ' /t. •
3" HOPE
LEAK DETECTION SYSTEM
B) (BO
Figure 4-3. MatCon1™ liner and cover cross-sections A-A' and B-B'.
-------
4" High x 12" Wide
Berm
Mounded Soil/
Drainage Divide
Backfilled Soil
8" Diameter Drain Pipe
Figure 4-4. Ditch cross-section.
-------
•-7 / 6 Wid€
6" Wide Ditch
12MATCON™
Berms (4" High)
3%
'I
-46'-
8'
-8" Diameter Drain Pipe
4"x4'x4' Metering Pit (Cement)
^>l / - ^Rip Rap — \ x, s -
-ls /X-jx /\-|N /
— — 1 ^^—1 x ^ — I
-12'-
NOT TO SCALE
Figure 4-5. Monitoring pit/french drain.
23
-------
To monitor infiltration, the four 3-inch-diameter (7.5-
cm) HDPE pipes leading from the drainage layer were
connected to a 10-inch-diameter (25.4-cm) sump, as shown
in Figure 4-6. Field installation of this sump utilized a
single piece of HDPE pipe.
4.7.2 Tri-County Landfill
MatCon™ was installed at the TCL site in Elgin, Illinois,
by WCC as a final cover system in November 1999. The
project consisted of a 3.6-acre (16,092 m2) site that had
a subgrade previously prepared for WCC's final grading
and subsequent MatCon™ installation. WCC prepared
the final grade for paving, constructed the test section,
and installed the MatCon™ cover over a 2-week period
(Figure 4-7).
As part of the MatCon™ cap installation by WCC for
the TCL site, the patented three-layer leak detection
system was proposed. Review of the system design
by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE) and their
subsequent comments required the incorporation of
several modifications for the lysimeter that was installed.
Specific changes in the design included the use of aHDPE
membrane liner as the underlying impermeable barrier.
This was placed on top of a panel of conventional asphalt,
over which a geotextile fabric was placed for protection
and cushion purposes. The rounded drainage rock material
was placed over the geotextile fabric as a replacement for
the open-graded MatCon.™ The entire installation was
then covered with the final MatCon™ panel (Figures 4-8
and 4-9). The lysimeter pipe and sump were installed by
Waste Management, Inc. (WMI).
4.1.3 Installation Details
Installation of the MatCon™ covers at both the DAFB and
the TCL sites was observed to document the construction
details and construction quality.
4.1.3.1 Subgrade and Drainage Systems
At the TCL site, the underlying subgrade was firm and
unyielding, and was compacted using conventional heavy
load proof-rolling procedures. Surface grades of 1 to
3 percent were used to facilitate drainage of the final
surface. The subgrade was inspected and accepted by
WCC personnel. The surface was finish graded to within
the tolerance of ± 0.5-inch (1.2-cm) measured using a 10-
foot (3-meter) straight-edge level prior to paving.
At the TCL site, coarse aggregate placed as the drainage
layer of the lysimeter facilitated the conveyance of water
horizontally but could not be compacted to a firm and
unyielding condition. This resulted in difficulties during
the paving operation.
All retaining sidewalls, piping, and sump appurtenances
were designed to be water tight. Sump design prevented
intrusion from rain and snow (gasketed lid) and included
protection from freezing temperatures, methods to adjust
to barometric pressure changes and minimize condensation
(adequate weatherproof venting), and measures for secure
access (locking lid).
4.1.3.2 Cover Construction Quality
At the TCL site, a crack at a cold joint appeared after a
prolonged period of cold weather in January 2000. The
edge of the asphalt application is typically more difficultto
compact because there is no lateral support for the roller.
When the asphalt is hot, the edges weld together properly.
However, an edge that is allowed to cool overnight is then
very difficult to bond to the next day's first application of
asphalt. In addition, it is especially difficult to increase
density in the cold joint area. The result is a zone along
the cold joint that may be poorly compacted. Raveling,
or separation of aggregate particle fines from the surface
or edges of the compacted asphalt, can occur in these
zones. Although WCC has determined that poor quality
workmanship was the cause, a belter design has since
been developed to overcome the raveling and reduce
dependency on workmanship. A wedge-shaped cold
joint panel (3-meters wide) proved to be a good design
in terms of bonding and providing a good impermeable
mat. The new design includes removal of some material
and a heavy tack coating.
The crack that appeared at the cold joint at the TCL site
was routed and sealed. The zone along the cold joint,
about 3 feet wide (0.91 meter), was sealed with mastic to
decrease the permeability by filling the surface voids.
4.2 Evaluation Procedures
Procedures used to evaluate the MatCon™ cover and
compare it with conventional asphalt were described in
the Technology Evaluation Plan/Quality Assurance Project
Plan (TEP/QAPP) (TetraTech2000). Field sampling ofthe
slabs and cores at the DAFB site was completed in August
1999. Samples were obtained at the TCL site immediately
after cover installation in November 1999, and then
again in April 2000 to obtain samples in a portion ofthe
24
-------
Slip Cap Cover
UPfc Overtlow Pipe (Outlet)
"^^-^
Mesh Screen
^"\^
Backfilled Soil
Around Pipe
Sump Bottom
HOPE solid cap ""~-\^^
x"
3 i_ Compression Cap
~— Vent Hole
Ground Surface
MATCON™ Cover
•^ Flow from 3" HOPE Pipe (Inlet)
X
Elbow "T"
10-inch diameter HOPE pipe,
jS' Schedule 40 or greater
1
NOT TO SCALE
Figure 4-6. MatCon™ liner and cover system leak detection sump.
25
-------
1X3
05
B
3" Diameter
Perforated PE Pipe
MatCon™ Asphalt
•80'-
\ t
3.3% __ ^
2'
B1
\
4
MatCon™ Asphalt with
Drainage Channel Below
3" Diameter
Non-Perforated
PE Pipe
NOT TO SCALE
Figure 4-7. Plan view of the MatCon™ cover.
-------
30"-
MatCon™ Asphalt
4% Slope
MatCon™ Asphalt
— 3" Diameter Perforated Pipe
Transitioning to
Non-Perforated High-Density Polyurethane Pipe
•CoarseAggregate Backfill
(1 x 10-1 cm/s)
•16 oz. Geotextile
-40 Mil LLDPE Geomembrane
- Conventional Asphalt
•Prepared Coarse Aggregate
Base Course
NOTTO SCALE
Figure 4-8. Section A-A'
27
-------
100
MatCon™ Asphalt
Install Lysimeter
Pipe Seal
Diameter Non-Perforated
PE Conveyance Pipe
Sloping at Minimum of
1%Toward Sump
3" Diameter Perforated
PE Pipe
16 oz. Geotextile
40 Mil LLDPE Geomembrane
Conventional Asphalt
Prepared Coarse Aggregate
Base Course
NOTTO SCALE
Figure 4-9. Section B-B'.
28
-------
MatCon™ cover where a crack was observed. Extensive
testing of slab and core samples from the MatCon™ and
conventional asphalt sections was performed for the
DAFB site. However, only limited laboratory testing was
performed on the TCL cores.
The sampling methods, field and laboratory tests, and
the quality assurance procedures used for the field and
laboratory testing are detailed in this section.
4.2.7 Field Testing
This section discusses field testing at DAFB and TCL.
4.2.1.1 Basis of Measurement of Field
Permeability
Field permeability of the MatCon™ was calculated during
periods of rainfall by measuring the drainage volume into
the sump and using Darcy's Law. The permeability (k)
was calculated using the following equation.
k = QL/Ath
where Q = flow into the sump
L = nominal thickness of the MatCon™
cover
A = area of the cover
t = duration of the test
h = hydraulic head (as described below)
The variable ofhydraulic head (h) in the above equation was
based on the reported USGS rainfall amount during each
monitoring period. However, several assumptions were
required, which caused uncertainties in the calculation (see
Section4.4.1). Therefore, constant-exposurepondingtests
were established to better estimate the field permeability.
For ponding test permeability calculations, hydraulic head
(h) was equal to the thickness of the MatCon™ layer
plus the height of the water ponded on the surface of the
cover. Field measurements of water infiltration into the
MatCon™ cover were completed at the DAFB site from
April through July 2000. In addition, attempts were made
to obtain a hydrologic balance for the DAFB site during
April through June 2000 using a flow meter to measure
runoff from the MatCon™ cover.
4.2.1.2 DAFB Site
Data for the volume of drainage layer infiltration and
surface runoff were collected on a regular basis. These
data were recorded in a field book, and Tetra Tech
personnel performed hydrologic calculations. During
each trip, the drainage layer sump (DLS) was inspected
for integrity, and a water level measurement was taken.
The sump was evacuated for the next measurement. A
flow meter reading was obtained, and the monitoring pit
was pumped out.
Data for the DLS were collected using a measuring tape.
The depth of the water column accumulated in the sump
was recorded in triplicate. The average depth measurement
was then converted to a volume in gallons. This volume
was then used to calculate a permeability value using
Darcy's law, as described above.
Data from the surface drainage flow meter were more
problematic. Consistent cumulative measurements were
difficult to record due to the recurring heavy rainfall and
subsequent flooding of the site. Therefore, reliable flow
data could not be obtained.
A 6-hour ponding test was conducted that consisted of
applying ahead of approximately 2.5 inches (6.2 cm) of
water over the MatCon™ Section I area while monitoring
the flow in the DLS.
4.2.1.3 TCL Site
Monitoring trips were conducted to collect data for the
volume drainage layer infiltration and surface runoff.
Bi-weekly trips were made to the TCL site to measure
the water level in the sump. The trip was planned after
a rainfall event of 1 inch (2.5 cm) or more during the
past 24 hours. After the measurement, the sump was
bailed out for the next measurement. Using the sump
water levels,, the drainage volume was determined, and
the permeability of the MatCon™ cover was calculated
using Darcy's law.
A 4-inch-high (10-cm) asphalt berm was constructed
around the perimeter of the test section on top of the
MatCon™ cover. In addition, berms were added between
the edge berms, forming a series of terraces where water
could be impounded. Water from both a tank truck and
heavy rainfall filled the terraces to an average depth of
about 2 to 2.5 inches (5.1 to 6.2 cm) and was maintained
for almost 48 hours. During this period, the water
inflow to the sump was monitored and used to calculate
the permeability of the MatCon™ cover. A steady-state
condition was reached in about 6 hours.
4.2.2 Sampling Methods
The objectives of the field sampling program were to obtain
representative samples of the MatCon™ and conventional
29
-------
asphalt covers for subsequent laboratory testing. This
section describes the sampling objectives, the sampling
locations, and sampling procedures for the MatCon™and
conventional asphalt covers.
4.2.2.1 Sampling Objectives
The following general objectives were used for all
sampling activities:
• Collect samples in a manner that ensures they will
represent the medium being sampled
• Maintain proper chain-of-custody control of all
samples, from collection to testing
• Follow QA/QC procedures appropriate for EPA
National Risk Management Research Laboratory
(NRMRL) Applied Research Projects
4.2.2.2 Sampling Locations and Procedures
The cover at the DAFB site was planned to be a long-
term functioning cover, and was not constructed solely
for demonstrations purposes. Therefore, the sampling
strategy sought to minimize the amount of area impacted
by sample coring, so that repairs to the cover could
be implemented more effectively. It was decided that
confining the sample cores to one subarea of the cover
would still provide representative samples because the
entire cover was installed in two days using the same work
crew, materials, and procedures for all areas of the cover.
Asphalt core and slab samples were collected from a 3-ft
by 3-ft (0.91-by 0.91-meter) sampling area in Section I
and from 6-ft by 8-ft (1.8- by 2.4-meter) sampling areas
in Sections II and III, as shown in Figure 4-10. The
number of samples taken in each of the three sections of
the demonstration cover is listed in Table 4-1.
PRI collected samples from the locations shown on Figure
4-10 on August 26 and 27, 1999. A coring machine was
used to obtain the 4-inch-diameter (10-cm) and 6-inch-
diameter (15-cm) cores, and a diamond-toothed saw was
used to obtain the slab samples. Areas where samples
were collected were then patched with hot mix asphalt
by WCC.
Samples at the TCL site were not obtained from the 30-ft
by 80-ft(9.1-by 24.4-m)test section. They were obtained
instead from an adjacent location where light poles were
to be installed on the cover. Six cores were obtained
initially, and five more cores were obtained in April 2000
at the location of a crack. The only testing that was done
with these cores was aggregate properties, void space, and
hydraulic permeability.
4.2.2.3 Sample Identification and Handling
Samples obtained by PRI Asphalt Technologies, Inc. (PRI)
were identified by location and sample number, and were
packed carefully in padded containers. Chain-of-custody
forms were filled out by PRI to document the acquisition
of the field samples. The containers were transported by
PRI personnel in a van to PRI's laboratories in Tampa,
Florida. The PRI personnel in the laboratory signed
the chain-of-custody forms to document receipt of the
samples. PRI had custody of the samples from field
acquisition to receipt in the laboratory.
Laboratory tests run on the samples are listed in Table
4-2; a description of each of these tests is provided in
the TER.
4.2.3 Laboratory Testing
The testing methods selected for the project are those
standardized by the American Society of Testing and
Materials (AS™) and the American Association of State
Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO).
Calibration of equipment used to perform the standardized
tests (AS™ and AASHTO) was performed, when required,
as recommended in the procedure (AS™ 1997).
For the flexural test that simulates the effect of differential
settlement on the MatCon™ cover, no standardized test is
available; however, Dr. Ronald Terrel of Terrel Research
devised a test that was used for this demonstration. These
laboratory testing methods are described in further detail
in the Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP).
4.2.4 Quality Assurance and Quality
Control Program
The overall objective for this evaluation was to produce
well-documented data of known quality. Quality is
measured by monitoring data precision and accuracy,
completeness, representativeness, and comparability.
The evaluation was designed to ensure that a sufficient
number of samples were collected to represent the cover
material at each given site and that each sample was
taken in a manner that ensures representativeness to the
extent practical.
30
-------
•«*•
CM
I
12" MATCON™
.Seam
3"x3"
Sampling
Area
4" MATCON™
.Seam
6'x8'
Sampling
Area
4" Conventional Paving Mix
-Seam
6W
Sampling
Area
-46'-
-74'-
-100'-
NOT TO SCALE
Figure 4-10. Sampling area locations.
-------
Table 4-1. Cover Sample Type, Numbers, and Labeling-DAFB Site
Sample
Type
Core
Slabs
Core
Slabs
Slabs
Approximate
Size
4" (10 cm)
diameter
6" (15 cm)
diameter
14" x 40"
(35 x 100 cm)
4" (10 cm)
diameter
6" (15 cm)
diameter
14" x 40"
(35 x 100 cm)
14" x 14"
(35 x 35 cm)
Quantity
5
5
5
12
8
4
5
5
5
12
8
4
4
Location
Section III
4" (10 cm)
Conventional
Paving
Mix
Section II
4" (10 cm)
MatCon™
Section I
12" (30 cm)
MatCon™
Label
4-1 through 4-5
5d-l through 5d-5
2a-l through 2a-5
7-1 through 7- 12
2b-l through 2b-8
A, B, C, D
4-1 through 4-5
5d-l through 5d-5
2a-l through 2a-5
7-1 through 7- 12
2b-l through 2b-8
A, B, C, D
A, B, C, D
32
-------
Table 4-2. Characterization Testing on Asphalt Samples-DAFB Site
Parameter
Sampling
Location
Section
I II III
Proposed Test
Samples Used
Hydraulic Conductivity
Flexural Properties
Load Capacity/ Deformation
Shear
Joint Integrity
(permeability)3
Tensile Strength
Thermal Crack Resistance
X X ASTM D-5084 and
AASHTO T-283
X X Differential Settling
Test at 25 °C (one
month duration)
X X Resilient Modulus
at 25 °C
ASTM D-4123
X X Shear Test at 4, 20,
and 40 and 60 °C
AASHTO TP 7
X X ASTM 5084
X X AASHTO TP 9
X X AASHTO TP 10
Degradation and Accelerated X X ASTM D-5084
Weathering Properties AASHTO TP 31
Voids and Asphalt Binder X X
Content
Layer Thickness XXX
Aggregate Properties X X
Hydraulic Transmissivity X
(Drainage layer only)
ASTM D-3203 and
AASHTO TP 53
Direct
measurement with
ruler
ASTM C-136,
C-131,C-127,
D-2172
Modified ASTM
D-5084
4" diameter cores, 3 replicates
4" x 4" x 3 6" slab2
2 replicates
4" diameter cores,
3 replicates
6" diameter cores, 2 replicates
per temperature per section
4" diameter cores, 3 replicates
4" x 4" x 10" slab2,
3 replicates
4" x 4" x 10" slab2,
3 replicates
4" diameter cores
Aged using water, ultra-violet
light, and kerosene. Tested at
initial, 1 week, 1 month, and 2
months, 2 replicates
4" diameter cores, 3 replicates
cores and slabs,
3 replicates
4" diameter cores,
3 replicates
12" x 12" x 12" slabs2,
2 replicates
Notes:
1 Cores from the TCL site were analyzed for hydraulic conductivity only
2 Slabs were cut to size using a diamond-toothed saw
3 After cracking and prior to j oint repair
33
-------
The comparability of the data was maximized by using
standard AS™ and AASHTO methods. Comparability
was also maximized through the use of consistent sample
collection techniques and field measurement methods
throughout the evaluation.
4.2.4.1 Field Quality Control Program
Field quality control procedures consisted of a water-level
meter precision check atthe TLC site. This quality control
check was not implemented at the DAFB site because a
measuring tape was used to obtain the depth to water. After
each field measurement event, the following precision-
check procedure was executed. First, a graduated cylinder
was fitted with a measuring scale divided into 0.10-inch
(0.25-cm) increments. The vessel was then filled with
water and the field water-level meter was used to obtain a
measurement in the vessel. This measurement was taken
three times. If the three measurements agreed within 0.1-
inch (0.25-cm) of each other, the water-level meter was
considered acceptable.
Each water-level measurementtaken in the sump was taken
three times to ensure precision. These three measurements
were then used to calculate the relative percent difference
(RPD). The measurements were accepted if they met
the criteria of being less than a RPD of 2. If accepted,
the three values were averaged and used to calculate the
MatCon™ permeability.
The accuracy of the in-line volumetric flow meter was
determined by field checking using a bucket and stopwatch
method. The procedure required that flow occurred at
the time of the field check, thus these checks had to be
executed during rain events. The beginning flow rate
registering on the flow meter was recorded to start. Then
a 3-gallon (11.4-liter) bucket was filled at the outflow
of the runoff discharge pipe while elapsed time was
measured. The volume was then divided by the elapsed
time to give a rate, which was compared to the rate read
from the flow meter. Lastly, the rate was again read from
the flow meter to ensure consistency in readings. If the
difference between the flow meter and the bucket and
stopwatch estimation was within 5 percent, the flow meter
was considered accurate.
4.2.4.2 Laboratory Quality Control Program
PRI completed all the laboratory tests listed in Table
4-2 to characterize the cover materials at each site and
to compare the MatCon™ cover with the conventional
asphalt cover at the DAFB site. In conjunction with these
physical testing procedures, PRI routinely performed a
number of QC checks that are detailed in the QAPP (Tetra
Tech 2000).
Calibration of the test equipment was performed, where
required, and records maintained at PRI. For the air voids
and binder property measurement, standard AASHTO
specimens were used. Results obtained were within two
standard deviations of the mean published by the Asphalt
Materials Reference Library (AMRL) proficiency standard
samples. The AMRL is maintained by the National
Institute of Standards. Except for the shear test data, all
other test data were within the acceptance criteria detailed
in the QAPP. Due to equipment malfunction at the Auburn
University laboratory (PRI's subcontractor), the shear test
data were unacceptable.
Laboratory data were checked regularly for consistency
with the expected result. For example, when the laboratory
permeability results of the MatCon™ samples were
significantly greater (greater than 1 x 10~6cm/sec) than the
expected value of 1 x 10~8 cm/sec, analyses of the air void
percentage of the samples were found to be higher than
the expected value of 3 percent. Air void percentage is a
primary factor in the performance of the MatCon cover.
In a real-world landfill cover application project, void
percentages of greater than 3 percent would warrant the
re-installation of the cover. Therefore, for the purposes
of this demonstration, additional cores were obtained
from the MatCon™ slab sample and analyzed for air
void percentage. Based on these results, a re-analysis
of permeability was conducted on core samples with 3
percent or less air void percentage. These results are
presented in Section 3.0.
4.3 SITE Demonstration Results and
Conclusions
The results of the evaluation are presented below in relation
to the primary and secondary objectives established for
the evaluation in the TEP/QAPP. Primary (P) objectives
are considered critical for the technology evaluation,
and secondary (S) objectives provide additional useful
information.
PI—Determine if the MatCon™ cover exhibits a field
permeability of less than the RCRA Subtitle C requirement
of 10~7 centimeters per second (cm/sec).
To estimate the field permeability of the MatCon™ cover,
the volume of infiltration during individual rainfall events
was measured over the 6-month demonstration period at
34
-------
each of the two sites. Using Darcy's Law, the measured
infiltration rates were converted into estimates of field
permeability, and these estimates were compared to the
regulatory requirement.
The in-field permeability calculated from measured
infiltration for the MatCon™ covers at the DAFB and TCL
sites is provided in Table 4-3. The table indicates that
the in-field permeabilities are up to 3 orders of magnitude
lower than the requirement for RCRA Subtitle C landfill
covers.
P2—Compare the laboratory-measured permeability
andflexural properties of the MatCon™ cover and the
conventional asphalt cover at the DAFB site.
The vendor claims that the MatCon™ cover is both
less permeable and has superior flexural properties
when compared to conventional asphalt. To test these
claims, laboratory tests that evaluate the two properties
were conducted on both MatCon™ and conventional
asphalt samples from the DAFB site. Results for each
parameter were then comparedusing descriptive statistics
to determine whether the MatCon™ cover appears to be
superior to conventional asphalt for these two critical
parameters.
Table 4-4 provides a summary of the laboratory properties
of MatCon™ and conventional asphalt. As shown in this
table, the average permeability of MatCon™ was about
four orders of magnitude lower than that of conventional
asphalt. The flexural tests of the MatCon™ cover samples
indicate that a 36-inch-long (91.4-cm) beam can sustain
20.41 millimeters of deflection without cracking, whereas
conventional asphalt cracked at 7 to 10 millimeters of
deflection. Further, the MatCon™ cover sample had no
cracks under 20 millimeter of deflection, whereas the
conventional asphalthad 3-millimeter-wide, 2.5-cm-long
cracks at about 25 millimeter of deflection.
SI—Measure other laboratory-measured physical
properties of the MatCon™ cover and the conventional
asphalt cover at the DAFB site
The vendor makes no specific claim for the superiority
of MatCon™ to conventional asphalt with respect to
physical parameters other than permeability and flexural
properties. However, differences in other physical
properties that can be measured in the laboratory may be
of interest to potential users. Therefore, samples of both
the MatCon™ cover and the conventional cover were taken
Table 4-3. Estimated In-Field Permeability of MatCon1™ Cover During Rainfall Events*
Period Ending Measured Leakage Calculated
Volume (m3) Permeability (cm/sec)
Dover Air Force Base
07-Apr-OO
17-Apr-OO
27-Apr-OO
09-May-OO
16-May-OO
26-May-OO
09-Jun-OO
Tri-County Landfill
20-May-OO
02-Jun-OO
7-Jul-OO
21-Jul-OO
3.3E-02
6.4E-03
6.2E-02
6.4E-03
6.3E-02
6.3E-02
6.3E-02
2.8E-03
5.9E-04
2.7E-03
9.4E-03
4.5E-08
1.3E-08
1.3E-07
2.6E-08
1.3E-08
8.5E-08
8.5E-08
1.9E-09
5.2E-10
3.4E-09
1.5E-08
* At each site, a ponding test was also conducted to measure
in-field permeability.
35
-------
Table 4-4. Statistical Summary of Laboratory Data.
Parameter MatCon™ Asphalt
No. of Mean Std. Min. Max. No. of
Samples Dev. Samples
Tri County
Landfill 4 1.55 0.87 0.25 2.1
(TCL) Void
Space, %
TCL <1.0 <1.0 <1.0
Hydraulic 7 x O2 x x -
Conductivity 10'8 10'8 10'8
(cores) cm/sec
DoverAir <1.0 <1.0 <1.0
Force Base 4 x O2 x x 3
(DAFB) 10-8 10-8 10-8
Hydraulic
Conductivity
(cores)
Flexural
Properties at
Center, 2 18.96 2.08 17.51 20.41 2
Deflection in
mm
Joint Integrity 3 5.47 2.02 x 4.3 x 7.5 x 3
cm/sec xlO-5 lO'5 10'5 10'5
Conductivity
after
Accelerated 3 7.35 6.05 x 1.65 x 1.37 x 3
Weathering x 10'9 10'9 10'9 10'8
30 days,
cm/sec
Conductivity
after
Accelerated 3 2.2 x 3.8x 3.9 x 6.6 x 3
Weathering 10'6 10'6 10'9 10'6
60 days,
cm/sec
Fuel
Resistance
(Kerosene) 8 1.5 0 1.5 1.5 8
Depth of
Penetration,
cm
Conventional Asphalt
Mean Std. Min. Max
Dev.
_ _ _
_ _ _
1.04
x 1.5 x 1.8 x 2.75
lO-4 lO-4 10-5 xlO-4
31.25 7.54 25.92 36.58
1.04
x 1.5 x 1.8 x 2.75
lO-4 10-4 io-5 10-4
2.96
x 2.89 x 2.65 x 3.22
lO-4 1Q-4 10-4 10-4
3.15
x 1.32 x 1.77 x 4.41
lO-4 io-4 io-4 xio-4
5.5 0.53 5 6
36
-------
Table 4-4. Statistical Summary of Laboratory Data (continued).
Parameter MatCon™ Asphalt
No. of Std.
Samples Mean Dev. Min.
Conventional Asphalt
No. of Std.
Max Samples Mean Dev.
Min. Max.
DAFB
Void Space, 4
1.53 0.33 1.25 1.89
10.53 1.17 9.2 12.7
Coarse
Aggregate 3 2.74 0.01 2.73 2.75 3 2.75 0.03 2.72 2.78
Specific
Gravity
Fine
Aggregate 3 2.72 0.01 2.71 2.72 3 2.74 0.01 2.73 2.74
Specific
Gravity
from the DAFB site and analyzed for various parameters
pertinenttothe physical performance of asphalt paving and
covers. Results for each parameter were then compared
using descriptive statistics to determine if there are any
significant differences between the two types of covers.
The physical properties measured to satisfy objective S1
are listed below:
• Joint integrity
• Load capacity and deformation
• Shear strength
• Tensile strength
• Thermal crack resistance
• Aging and degradation properties
• Void space
• Aggregate properties
S2—Determine whether extreme weather conditions or
vehicle loads affect the field performance of the MatCon™
cover
To evaluate this objective, the MatCon™ covers at both
sites were inspected periodically in the field, particularly
following periods of extreme cold or other adverse weather
conditions, to assess whether any cracks or surface
deformities developed. These field inspections were used
to evaluate the effects of extreme weather or vehicle loads
since the previous inspection. General information on use
of the covers for parking and on recent weather events was
collected from the site owners and evaluated against any
deformities noted in the field inspections. The TCL site
in Elgin, Illinois, encountered much colder temperatures
than the DAFB site in Dover, Delaware. As a result,
data on the impacts of extreme cold were observed only
at the TCL site.
At the TCL site, WMI parked their garbage trucks during
the night and their waste recycling trucks traveled over the
MatCon™ cover during the day. Further, the MatCon™
cover was subjected to extremely cold, sub-zero weather
during January through March 2000. In late January,
a crack was observed on the cover surface. This was
investigated by taking core samples at the crack location
and obtaining nuclear density measurements in the vicinity
of the crack. Except for the core sample on the crack
that had developed at a cold joint, all samples showed a
permeability in the range of 10~7 cm/sec to 10~9 cm/sec.
The sample on the crack had 8.2 percent air voids and a
37
-------
permeability of 3.56 x 10'5 cm/sec, indicating it was poorly
compacted due to inadequate field quality control.
Based on the investigation, WCC improved the design
and construction procedures for cold joint construction for
MatCon™ covers. The crack was repaired by routing the
j oint, cleaning the j oint using a hot air lance, and extruding
it full of hot modified asphalt mastic joint sealer. Apart
from the crack that developed at the cold joint, the rest
of the MatCon™ cover performed well under extreme
weather conditions and vehicle loads.
S3—Estimate a cumulative hydrologic balance for the
MatCon™ cover over the period of the demonstration at
the DAFB site
A hydrologic balance for the cover system was estimated
at the DAFB site. The hydrologic balance was based on
cumulative precipitation, totalized surface runoff, and
subsurface drainage overthe entire 6-month demonstration
period. Although the hydrologic balance is approximate
because of the length of time involved, it may provide
additional insights into the performance of the MatCon™
cover.
Theoretically, the infiltration into the MatCon™ cover
could be determined by using the equation
I = P - ET - Qs, where
I = Infiltration
P = Precipitation volume
ET = Evapotranspiration from the MatCon™ surface
Qs = Runoff
However, heavy precipitation events resulted in flooding
and precluded accurate measurement of surface runoff.
Therefore, a hydrologic balance for the DAFB site could
not be obtained in this manner.
S4—Estimate the cost for constructing the MatCon™
cover and maintaining the cover for the duration of the
demonstration
The capital and operating costs for the MatCon™ cover
technology, as demonstrated at both the DAFB and TCL
sites, were estimated based on cost information obtained
from WCC and reviewed by Tetra Tech. The costs of the
MatCon™ installation are detailed in Section 3.0 of this
report.
4.4 Discussion of Results
A discussion of the field and laboratory measurements
affecting MatCon™ performance is provided below.
4.4.1 Discussion of Field Data
The measured field permeability varied from a high value
of 1.28 x 10"7 cm/sec to a low value of 5.15 x 10~10 cm/sec.
The field permeability data calculations were based on
several assumptions and Darcy's law. The uncertainties
in the calculations included the following.
• The head was based on measured precipitation over
the entire site; however, the MatCon™ surface was
not subjected to the uniform head assumed for the
precipitation event. Most of the precipitation did not
remain on the surface, except for the two ponding
tests.
• Infiltration measured as water volume in the sump
does not account for changes in the water retained
in the drainage layer.
• There was uncertainty at the DAFB site about the
measurement of infiltration into the drainage layer.
The high groundwater table at the site resulted
in flooding, and there is a possibility that water
infiltrated through the sidewalls of the sump.
To minimize uncertainties, a ponding test was then
conducted at the TCL site during a 48-hour period.
Oversight was provided by COE and EPApersonnel. This
resulted in a measured permeability value of 5 x 10~8 cm/
sec. This value is higher than that obtained during rainfall
events probably because during rainfall events a consistent
hydraulic head is not maintained. The water head was
maintained on the MatCon™ surface more consistently
during the ponding test. The ponding test at the DAFB
site yielded a result of 1.25 x 10~8 cm/sec.
4.4.2 Laboratory Data
The laboratory data presented in Table 4-4 and elaborated
in this section provide a comparison of MatCon™ and
conventional asphalt. As discussed in Sections 4.4.1 and
4.4.2, the primary physical properties that were studied
included permeability and flexural properties, and the
secondary physical propertiesthatwere measured included
thermal crack resistance, load capacity and deformation,
tensile strength, and aging and degradation properties.
These properties are discussed below.
38
-------
4.4.2.1 Permeability
Permeability is a critical parameter determining the
performance of the MatCon™ cover. Table 4-4 indicates
that the laboratory permeability of MatCon™ is about
four orders of magnitude lower than conventional asphalt,
and is less than 1 x 10~8 cm/sec. This is due to the lower
void space and higher density of MatCon™ compared to
conventional asphalt.
4.4.2.2 Flexural Properties
The ability of MatCon™ to settle over potential voids
in the underlying materials isan important characteristic
when considering caps over fills associated with waste
materials. Most traditional tests for highway engineering
do not consider flexural behavior that can occur with high
strains in these settings. Consequently, a specialized test
was used in this study to consider large strains.
Comparative data for MatCon™ and conventional asphalt
are presented in Figure 4-11. This figure illustrates the
total deflection versus time with notes indicating the
onset of cracking. In all cases, the conventional material
started cracking before the total deflection reached 15
millimeters, while the MatCon™ did not crack even at
deflections as large as 20 millimeters. This increase in
strain tolerance is attributed to the improved binder that
is used in the MatCon™ system. The data collected
demonstrate that MatCon™ is able to experience larger
strains and deflections than conventional asphalt without
cracking.
4.4.2.3 Load Capacity and Deformation
Introducing a loading stress, such as the weight of a
vehicle, causes strains in the asphalt structure. These
strains can lead to premature failure if the structure is not
designed adequately. Two modes of failure are generally
considered for the design of asphalt structures, which are
dependent upon the resilient properties of the materials: (1)
fatigue failure is dependent on resilient modulus/stiffness
and fatigue properties of the materials and (2) permanent
deformation, which is controlled by the aggregate interlock
and high temperature properties of the binder.
Load capacity is determined by assessment of the resilient
modulus over a range of conditions, and the permanent
deformation behavior is measured with shear testing.
The resilient modulus was measured for temperatures
ranging from -20 °C to +80 °C. The modulus of
MatCon™ was 2048 MPa compared to 3200 MPa for the
conventional asphalt. The reduced resilient modulus of
the MatCon™ was due to the use of a modified binder that
is more flexible at the lower temperatures applied in the
resilientmodulustest. However, athighertemperatures,the
modulus of the MatCon™ exceeded that for conventional
asphalt. This indicatesthatMatCon™performs acceptably
over a wider range of temperatures than conventional
asphalt for distress modes such as cracking (at lower
temperatures) and permanent deformation and rutting (at
higher temperatures).
4.4.2.4 Tensile Strength
Tensile strength affects cracking due to thermal- or load-
related effects. The tensile strength of asphalt materials
varies with temperature, time of loading, and magnitude
of strain. High stiffness materials are subjected to more
stress at lower temperatures, and hence can be more
susceptible to cracking.
The low temperature tensile properties of MatCon™ and
conventional asphalt are shown in Table 4-5. The data
show that the tensile strength of the MatCon™ material
is approximately 50 percent greaterthan for conventional
asphalt, and that the expected cracking temperature is
approximately 5 to 7 °C lower.
The tensile properties of MatCon™ indicate that it should
be more resistantto the formation of cracks over the range
of temperatures anticipated in a landfill surface cover.
Of particular importance is the low-temperature tensile
properties, since asphalt materials generally crack at these
temperature extremes. At low temperatures, MatCon's™
tensile properties enable it to be used in significantly
harsher climatic regions without the risk of cracking.
4.4.2.5 Thermal Crack Resistance
As asphalt materials cool, the natural tendency is for
the material to attempt to contract as a function of
the coefficient of thermal expansion. However, the
contraction is effectively prevented by the structure;
consequently, thermal stress builds in the asphaltic material
as the temperature drops. The increase in thermal stress
eventually results in fracture if the tensile strength of the
material is exceeded.
The asphalt binder choice has the most significant impact
on thermal crack resistance. Other factors, such as
aggregate choice and subgrade type, affect the density
and degree of cracking after cracks have started.
39
-------
40
35
30
25
|>H
?
1 r2 = 0.9962
C,2 r2 = 0.9816
M,1 r2 = 0.9952
M,2 r2 = 0.9835
Very wide cracks
Extra cracks forms
3rd hairline crack develops
2nd crack, 2cm long
1 Hairline crack, 1cm long 7
Crack 3mm wide, 2.5cm long
Crack 0.4mm wide, 2.5cm long^
Crack 0.4mm wide, 1.5cm long
1 Hairline crack, 1cm long
15 20
Time (days)
Source: PRI Asphalt Technologies, Inc. 2000*
Figure 4-11. Curves showing deflection versus time.
Table 4-5. Tensile Properties for Binder and Mixture at Cold Temperatures
Cracked
^^^^y x
^*7X
Cracked
• Com/., Rep. 1 - C,1
., Rep. 2 - C,2
• MatCon, Rep. 1 - M,1
A MatCon, Rep. 2 - M,2
25
30
35
Tensile Properties Derived from Tests On:
Property
Binder
Mixture
Conventional
Asphalt
Tensile Strength (MPa) 1.86
Fracture Temperature (°C) -18.8
MatCon™ Conventional MatCon™
Asphalt
2.97 2.579 3.551
-25.7 -25.4 -29.7
40
-------
The results obtained are presented in Figure 4-12. The
MatCon™ samples had a higher fracture strength (by
37 percent) and a 4.3 °C lower fracture temperature
than conventional asphalt. The test results indicate that
MatCon™ has improved low temperature behavior and
will resist thermal cracking better than conventional
asphalt. The degree of improvement in both fracture
strength and temperature is attributed to the modified
binder.
4.4.2.6 Aging and Degradation Properties
Aging of asphalt materials is caused by several chemical
and physical processes, especially oxidation and
volatilization. Volatilization isthe loss of lighter molecular
weight fractions through evaporation that begins with
distillation of crude oil. Removal of lighter fuel oils
leaves heavier residue, including asphalt. Further refining
and processing results in a stable base asphalt cement
that is then engineered for various uses, such as paving
and roofing. The quality of asphalt is governed largely
by the source of crude oil, and the only sources used for
MatCon™ are those in which long term stability and
further volatilization are minimized. These properties are
evaluated using standardized test protocols. The mass loss
of volatile material in a standard laboratory test is almost
immeasurable for high quality asphalt and is essentially
nil over the multi-year life expectancy of pavements.
For very dense, low void MatCon™ mixtures made with
modified asphalt, the expectation is for longevity much
greater than for conventional pavements. Several factors
contribute to this expectation, including the use of base
asphaltthat was selected for superior aging characteristics,
use of modifiers that chemically enhance resistance to
degradation, and the low voids that prevent intrusion of air
and water. The accelerated weathering tests used in this
study were adapted from the roofing industry, in particular
the International Conference of Building Officials (ICBO),
which typically attempts to predict performance of asphalt
roofing materials. However, any attempt to predict the
actual service life of MatCon™ based on this testing
would be speculative because of the many variables and
the heretofore unknown performance of MatCon.™ The
approach used in this study is to compare the behavior
between MatCon™ and conventional pavement on a
relative basis, both in the laboratory and by monitoring
field performance over several years.
The aging of asphalt materials is affected by a number
of parameters such as binder quality, mixture type,
and climate. However, if a system is made effectively
impermeable, the supply of oxygen needed to age-harden
the binder is effectively restricted. MatCon™ materials are
designed to achieve a low permeability and consequently,
aging is anticipated to be low. For all conditions tested,
the resilient modulus of the MatCon™ does not exceed
that of the conventional asphalt. The low void space and
higher binder content in MatCon™ results in the better
aging properties observed for MatCon™ compared to
conventional asphalt.
Accelerated aging provides an insight into how MatCon™
asphalt will perform over its expected life. The accelerated
aging test method is used to determine changes in asphalt
material and performance properties after 30 and 60 days of
exposure to cycles of ultraviolet light and water sprays. In
the accelerated aging study, the slab sections were placed
in an accelerated weathering chamber and left exposed
to cyclic ultraviolet light (20 hrs) and water sprays (3.5
hrs) with a surface temperature of approximately 160
°F. After 30 and 60 days, specimens were evaluated for
changes in binder properties due to ultraviolet light and
water exposure.
Results of binder property changes were reported as a PG
rating, which is the performance window of the asphalt
between a high and low temperature that the binder is
expected to perform without cracking. The PG rating
is the key component for long-term performance at the
high service temperature for properties indicative of a
susceptibility to deformation, such as rutting, and at the
low service temperature for properties that forecast a
susceptibility to fatigue and thermal cracking. A grading
system for asphalt was developed by the highway industry
and has been adapted by AS™ (AS™ D-6373).
The accelerated aging tests indicated that the MatCon™
binder was essentially unaffected by exposure to ultraviolet
light, maintaining the same performance grade, PG 82-22,
after 60 days of aging, whereas the conventional asphalt
binder lost both high and low temperature performance
grades upon exposure, going from the initial PG 82-22 to
PG 76-16 after 60 days of accelerated aging. The change
in PG rating of the conventional binder indicates the binder
has lost stiffness and elastic modulus at high temperatures
and flexibility and pliability at low temperatures. The
loss at low temperature is also indicative of a binder's
aging rate.
Review of the binder properties after exposure to
cyclic water sprays shows the MatCon™ binder has
a wider performance grade, PG 88-21 (109 °C), than
41
-------
Fracture Stress
(MPa)
Temperature
Conventional MatCon
Material Evaluated
Figure 4-12. Fracture stress (MPa) and temperature (°C) for MatCon™ and conventional material.
42
-------
the conventional binder, PG 82-19 (101 °C). The low
temperature properties after aging also indicate that the
MatCon™ binder has an improved resistance to low
temperature thermal cracking. A top to bottom profile
comparison indicated that the exposure to water had
minimal effect on the binder properties.
As seen from the data presented in Table 4-4, the
permeability of the conventional cover remained generally
unchanged after accelerated aging. The permeability of the
MatCon™ cover increased by an average of two orders of
magnitude, but remained one to two orders of magnitude
lower than that of the conventional cover. The degradation
of the MatCon™ after continued exposure to kerosene was
1.5 cm (out of a total 10-cm thickness). Under similar
conditions, conventional asphalt degraded by an average
of 5.5 cm (out of atotal of 10-cm thickness).
43
-------
Section 5
Technology Status
This section of the report describes commercial availability
and quality control requirements for the MatCon™
technology.
5.1 Commercial Availability
The first MatCon™ cover over incinerator fly ash was
installed in Ferndale, Washington, in 1989. This cover
maintains low permeability (less than 10-8 cm/sec) after
12 years of active use as a surface for material staging
and heavy equipment operation. Since then, MatCon™
has been approved by state regulating agencies for
projects in Delaware, Illinois, California, Florida, Texas,
New Mexico, and Kentucky, the states where it has been
presented by WCC.
The proprietary binder available from WCC can be shipped
to any hot mix asphalt plant in the country. The MatCon™
mix is prepared at the hot mix plant under the strict QC
specifications provided by WCC. Therefore, MatCon™
technology is commercially available throughout the
United States.
5.2 Construction Quality Assurance
Requirements
Based on the TCL proj ect findings, the key areas requiring
special attention during future MatCon™ installations are
described below.
• Adequate scheduling to allow for input on subgrade
design, followed by planning and coordination for
subsequent in-field construction progression
• Subgrade construction and preparation to ensure firm
and unyielding conditions that will allow for proper
MatCon™ compaction and facilitate proper drainage
from the final MatCon™ surface
• Monitoring MatCon™ hot-mix temperature s prior to
installation for material acceptance or rejection
Hourly in-field inspection and acceptance or rejection
of compacted MatCon™ based upon frequent and
mapped field density measurements
Construction and workmanship of cold joint panels
assuring compaction and sealing
Design, construction, and workmanship of any leak
detection or lysimeter structures
Provisions for quality control inspection technicians
to monitor, inspect, report, and either accept or reject:
subgrade conditions prior to paving; lysimeter or
leak detection systems; MatCon™ hot-mix plant
operations; MatCon™ hot-mix transfer and paving
activities; MatCon™ panel compaction and resultant
field densities; and cold joint construction methods
and sequences
44
-------
Section 6
References
American Association of State Highway and Transportation
Officials (AASHTO). 2000. Standard Specifications
for Transportation Materials and Methods of
Sampling and Testing, 20th Edition. AASHTO, 444
North Capital Street, Washington, DC.
American Society for Testing and Materials (AS™).
1997. Annual Book of AS™ Standards. Volume 4
(Construction). AS™. West Conshohocken, PA.
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). 2002. 40 CFR
Section 264.301. Subpart N - Landfills, Design and
Operating Requirements. July.
Dwyer, S.F. 1998. Construction Cost of Six Landfill
Cover Designs Sandia National Laboratories.
Albuquerque, New Mexico. September.
Tetra Tech EM Inc. (Tetra Tech). 2000.
Technology Evaluation Plan/Quality Assurance
Project Plan (TEP/QAPP), Wilder Construction
Company's MatCon™ Technology Evaluation at the
Lindane Source Area Site, West Management Unit,
Dover Air Force Base, Dover Delaware, and Tri-
County Landfill, Elgin, Illinois.February 8.
Wilder Construction Company (WCC). 1998.
Dover AFB, DE, Lindane Source Area SITE
Demonstration Program Application.
45
------- |